Cited by 192Muscle activation and electromyography studiesNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringMuscle Physiology and Disorders

Geometrical factors in surface EMG of the vastus medialis and lateralis muscles

Rainoldi, A, Nazzaro, M, Merletti, R, Farina, D, Caruso, I, Gaudenti, S·2000·Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

Abstract

Surface EMG signals detected in dynamic conditions are affected by a number of artefacts. Among them geometrical factors play an important role. During movement the muscle slides with respect to the skin because of the variation of its length. Such a shift can considerably modify sEMG amplitude. The purpose of this work is to assess geometrical artefacts on sEMG during isometric contractions at different muscle lengths. The average rectified value (ARV) of 15 single differential signals was obtained by means of a linear array of 16 bar electrodes from the vastus medialis and lateralis muscles. The knee angle was changed from 75 degrees to 165 degrees in steps of 30 degrees and voluntary isometric contractions at a low, medium and high force level were performed for each angle. The ARV pattern was normalized with respect to the mean activity to compare signals from different joint angles. From the data collected it was possible to separate the geometrical changes from the changes due to different intensities of activation. In three out of five subjects, we found (within the resolution of our measures) a 1 cm shift for the vastus medialis muscle while no shift was observed for the other two subjects. For the vastus lateralis muscle a 1 cm shift was found in two out of four subjects. Such a shift produces the main contribution to geometrical artefacts. To avoid such artefacts the innervation zones should be located and the EMG electrodes should not be placed near them.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1050-6411(00)00024-9

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rainoldi, A., Nazzaro, M., Merletti, R., Farina, D., Caruso, I., & Gaudenti, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT)
  • Politecnico di Torino (IT)
  • École Centrale de Nantes (FR)
Corresponding author
Merletti, R
Venue
Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-10
Volume
10
Issue
5
Pages
327-336
ISSN
1050-6411 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2018312124
Cited by
192
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministero della Salute
  • Regione Piemonte
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
Keywords
vastus medialis, vastus lateralis, muscle length, knee joint angle, isometric contraction, innervation zone, electrode placement
MeSH terms
Adult, Electromyography, Humans, Isometric Contraction, Leg, Male, Mathematics, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Artifacts, Muscle, Skeletal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review